Bengaluru stampede: Karnataka High Court orders release of RCB’s Nikhil Sosale and others

High Court orders release of RCB officials arrested after Bengaluru stampede, citing lack of evidence and jurisdiction.

In a major set back to the police and the State government, the High Court of Karnataka on June 12 ordered the release of four representatives of Royal Challengers Sports Private Limited (RCSPL) and DNA Networks Pvt. Ltd., who were arrested on the wee hours of June 6 in connection with the June 4 stampede outside M. Chinnaswamy stadium in Bengaluru during the celebration of RCB’s victory in IPL-2025 tournment.

Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar passed the order while allowing the petitions filed by Nikhil Sosale, Head (Marketing and Revenue), RCSPL; Sunil Mathew, Director, and Kiran Kumar, Event Manager of DNA; and Shamant N.P. Mavinakere, a freelancer service provider for DNA.

RCSPL is the owner of RCB cricket team and DNA is the event management firm for RCSPL. The Court has ordered their release on bail by imposing conditions. Copy of the order is yet to be released.

It was argued on behalf of the petitioners that they were arrested based solely on “the orders of the Chief Minister [Siddaramaiah] to arrest the officials of RCB and others” and without conducting any investigation and collecting any material to point out that the petitioners were responsible for the stampede, which resulted in the death of 11 persons.

They had also contended that they were arrested by the police, who had no jurisdiction either to investigate the cases registered in connection with the stampede or to arrest them.

Meanwhile, the State government had defended their arrest claiming that the police adhered to all the procedures laid down in law and by the apex court while arresting the accused persons in a criminal case.

However, the Government, either in its written statement or arguments, did not say anything on the court’s query whether Chief Minister had stated at a media conference that he had ordered the arrest of officials of the RCB and others. The government, in its written statement, had merely stated that the contention of the petitioners, that their arrest was made solely on the Chief Minister’s order, was not relevant for deciding the legality of their arrest.